CAUT

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Hi Don, we (Texas Tech School of music) were able to purchase a new Steinway D (new york) with the newly "re-designed" hammers. (Made/purchased in 2012). These particular hammers are AMAZING/incredible. Very "old school" is the best way I can think of to put it. Super easy to voice and work with. Best dynamic range of pretty much any New York hammers I have come accross personally. These are designed to not really need laquering/ hardeners, etc. And we have definitely not needed any. Almost all of our faculty who went to Dallas to select this piano agreed this was a great selection. (A near miracle for our diverse piano faculty!!) These do require a little more ongoing needling to maintain, but it is so worth it. 

Regarding all other models; I do not believe the company has made this improvement on any of their other models. For example, we had a huge donation the year before last and were able to buy 2 new Model A's and four Model Os. Feedback and experiences have been mixed but really good overall on these 6, with the exception of two of the model Os. Minor laquering to one, but one Model O kept going "dead" on the voicing. Long story short had to do multiple aplications of hardner to finally please our staff pianist!! Bottom line, it STILL just completely depends on the particular set of hammers you get or are "stuck with" when purchasing from Steinway. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely LOVE all of our Steinways. (About 14 in our school). I am sure others will have much to say, but I am convinced that they really have not made any major changes to anything other than their concert grands. Yay for that at least!!! Kevin

------------------------------
[Kevin] [Fortenberry] [RPT]
[Staff Techician]
[Texas Tech Univ]
[Lubbock] [TX]
[8067783962]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Hi, Don,

I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.

All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound “out of the box” was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and “woofy” sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.

The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.

The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a “drop”.)

Like Horace said, I’m finding that the new hammers still require a lot of “attention before being ready for prime time” but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.

I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that’s possible. Of the three sets I’ve installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you’ve got. Maybe I’ve been lucky.

I’ve also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it’s used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it’s suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that’s perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I’m marking my cans, just in case.

Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, “I’m not likely to change my approach”. That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.

Thanks, everyone, best to you all….

Kathy


Original Message------

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Hi, Don, Kathy, Kevin, et al,

I'm a bit pressed at the moment; and will try to get time next week to
respond more fully.

In the interim, I fully endorse what Kathy and Kevin have said about the
new iteration of NY hammers. Kathy defines exactly what I meant about
them still "requiring a lot of attention"...for me, this is largely
throughout the model line.

The changes are most immediately noticeable in the Ds and Bs, I think,
so far; but, there are changes in the smaller sizes that seem promising.

Anyway, back to significantly less-fun things to talk about.

More asap.

Kind regards.

Horace



On 1/19/2017 2:05 PM, Kathy Smith via Piano Technicians Guild wrote:
> Please do not forward this message due to Auto Login.
>
> Hi, Don,
>
> I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.
>
> All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound ???out of the box??? was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and ???woofy??? sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.
>
> The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.
>
> The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a ???drop???.)
>
> Like Horace said, I???m finding that the new hammers still require a lot of ???attention before being ready for prime time??? but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.
>
> I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that???s possible. Of the three sets I???ve installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you???ve got. Maybe I???ve been lucky.
>
> I???ve also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it???s used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it???s suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that???s perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I???m marking my cans, just in case.
>
> Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, ???I???m not likely to change my approach???. That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.
>
> Thanks, everyone, best to you all???.
>
> Kathy
>
>
Original Message------
>
> Horace,
>
> In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.
>
> I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.
>
> Thanks!
>
> ------------------------------
> [Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
> [Piano Technician]
> [dmckech@ithaca.edu]
> [Home 607.277.7112]
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Reply to Sender : http://my.ptg.org/eGroups/PostReply/?GroupId=49&SenderKey=762a7ddc-0d4b-4449-8060-280d22eed929&MID=670178&MDATE=756%253c45646%253e&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved
>
> Reply to Discussion : http://my.ptg.org/eGroups/PostReply/?GroupId=49&MID=670178&MDATE=756%253c45646%253e&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved
>
>
>
> You are subscribed to "CAUT" as hgreeley@sonic.net. To change your subscriptions, go to http://my.ptg.org/preferences?section=Subscriptions&MDATE=756%253c45646%253e&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved. To unsubscribe from this community discussion, go to http://my.ptg.org/HigherLogic/eGroups/Unsubscribe.aspx?UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved&GroupKey=e03c48ae-bba7-4045-9d5f-c5e4b7b46b15.
>


Original Message------

Hi, Don,

I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.

All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound “out of the box” was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and “woofy” sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.

The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.

The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a “drop”.)

Like Horace said, I’m finding that the new hammers still require a lot of “attention before being ready for prime time” but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.

I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that’s possible. Of the three sets I’ve installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you’ve got. Maybe I’ve been lucky.

I’ve also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it’s used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it’s suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that’s perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I’m marking my cans, just in case.

Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, “I’m not likely to change my approach”. That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.

Thanks, everyone, best to you all….

Kathy

Kathy, thanks for your input into this discussion. Your voice is always refreshing to hear.

Do you, or anyone else for that matter, know what Steinway's re-mixed hammer solution's ratio is?

------------------------------
-Phil Bondi
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 23:53
From: Horace Greeley
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Hi, Don, Kathy, Kevin, et al,

I'm a bit pressed at the moment; and will try to get time next week to
respond more fully.

In the interim, I fully endorse what Kathy and Kevin have said about the
new iteration of NY hammers. Kathy defines exactly what I meant about
them still "requiring a lot of attention"...for me, this is largely
throughout the model line.

The changes are most immediately noticeable in the Ds and Bs, I think,
so far; but, there are changes in the smaller sizes that seem promising.

Anyway, back to significantly less-fun things to talk about.

More asap.

Kind regards.

Horace



On 1/19/2017 2:05 PM, Kathy Smith via Piano Technicians Guild wrote:
> Please do not forward this message due to Auto Login.
>
> Hi, Don,
>
> I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.
>
> All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound ???out of the box??? was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and ???woofy??? sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.
>
> The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.
>
> The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a ???drop???.)
>
> Like Horace said, I???m finding that the new hammers still require a lot of ???attention before being ready for prime time??? but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.
>
> I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that???s possible. Of the three sets I???ve installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you???ve got. Maybe I???ve been lucky.
>
> I???ve also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it???s used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it???s suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that???s perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I???m marking my cans, just in case.
>
> Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, ???I???m not likely to change my approach???. That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.
>
> Thanks, everyone, best to you all???.
>
> Kathy
>
>

Phil, I completely agree regarding Kathy's post. Such a wealth of knowledge & experience right "where we really live". 

David Love, I could't agree more that it's nearly impossible to belive that there is ZERO laquer added to these newly re-develped hammers on the new New York Ds. All I can say is on this particular one piano, this set is like a DREAM. Needles go into the shoulders like no other Steinway hammers I have ever touched. That's why I was so pleasantly surprised--shocked even! I think they really could be "onto something" by trying to make them like they did "back in the day". But oh well, looks like consistency could still be an issue, etc. etc...

------------------------------
[Kevin] [Fortenberry] [RPT]
[Staff Techician]
[Texas Tech Univ]
[Lubbock] [TX]
[8067783962]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2017 07:11
From: Phil Bondi
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kathy, thanks for your input into this discussion. Your voice is always refreshing to hear.

Do you, or anyone else for that matter, know what Steinway's re-mixed hammer solution's ratio is?

------------------------------
-Phil Bondi
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 23:53
From: Horace Greeley
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Hi, Don, Kathy, Kevin, et al,

I'm a bit pressed at the moment; and will try to get time next week to
respond more fully.

In the interim, I fully endorse what Kathy and Kevin have said about the
new iteration of NY hammers. Kathy defines exactly what I meant about
them still "requiring a lot of attention"...for me, this is largely
throughout the model line.

The changes are most immediately noticeable in the Ds and Bs, I think,
so far; but, there are changes in the smaller sizes that seem promising.

Anyway, back to significantly less-fun things to talk about.

More asap.

Kind regards.

Horace



On 1/19/2017 2:05 PM, Kathy Smith via Piano Technicians Guild wrote:
> Please do not forward this message due to Auto Login.
>
> Hi, Don,
>
> I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.
>
> All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound ???out of the box??? was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and ???woofy??? sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.
>
> The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.
>
> The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a ???drop???.)
>
> Like Horace said, I???m finding that the new hammers still require a lot of ???attention before being ready for prime time??? but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.
>
> I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that???s possible. Of the three sets I???ve installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you???ve got. Maybe I???ve been lucky.
>
> I???ve also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it???s used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it???s suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that???s perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I???m marking my cans, just in case.
>
> Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, ???I???m not likely to change my approach???. That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.
>
> Thanks, everyone, best to you all???.
>
> Kathy
>
>

Original Message------

Phil, I completely agree regarding Kathy's post. Such a wealth of knowledge & experience right "where we really live". 

David Love, I could't agree more that it's nearly impossible to belive that there is ZERO laquer added to these newly re-develped hammers on the new New York Ds. All I can say is on this particular one piano, this set is like a DREAM. Needles go into the shoulders like no other Steinway hammers I have ever touched. That's why I was so pleasantly surprised--shocked even! I think they really could be "onto something" by trying to make them like they did "back in the day". But oh well, looks like consistency could still be an issue, etc. etc...

------------------------------
[Kevin] [Fortenberry] [RPT]
[Staff Techician]
[Texas Tech Univ]
[Lubbock] [TX]
[8067783962]
------------------------------

Original Message------

Phil, I completely agree regarding Kathy's post. Such a wealth of knowledge & experience right "where we really live". 

David Love, I could't agree more that it's nearly impossible to belive that there is ZERO laquer added to these newly re-develped hammers on the new New York Ds. All I can say is on this particular one piano, this set is like a DREAM. Needles go into the shoulders like no other Steinway hammers I have ever touched. That's why I was so pleasantly surprised--shocked even! I think they really could be "onto something" by trying to make them like they did "back in the day". But oh well, looks like consistency could still be an issue, etc. etc...

------------------------------
[Kevin] [Fortenberry] [RPT]
[Staff Techician]
[Texas Tech Univ]
[Lubbock] [TX]
[8067783962]
------------------------------

Original Message------

Hi, Don, Kathy, Kevin, et al,

I'm a bit pressed at the moment; and will try to get time next week to
respond more fully.

In the interim, I fully endorse what Kathy and Kevin have said about the
new iteration of NY hammers. Kathy defines exactly what I meant about
them still "requiring a lot of attention"...for me, this is largely
throughout the model line.

The changes are most immediately noticeable in the Ds and Bs, I think,
so far; but, there are changes in the smaller sizes that seem promising.

Anyway, back to significantly less-fun things to talk about.

More asap.

Kind regards.

Horace



On 1/19/2017 2:05 PM, Kathy Smith via Piano Technicians Guild wrote:
> Please do not forward this message due to Auto Login.
>
> Hi, Don,
>
> I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.
>
> All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound ???out of the box??? was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and ???woofy??? sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.
>
> The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.
>
> The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a ???drop???.)
>
> Like Horace said, I???m finding that the new hammers still require a lot of ???attention before being ready for prime time??? but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.
>
> I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that???s possible. Of the three sets I???ve installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you???ve got. Maybe I???ve been lucky.
>
> I???ve also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it???s used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it???s suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that???s perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I???m marking my cans, just in case.
>
> Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, ???I???m not likely to change my approach???. That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.
>
> Thanks, everyone, best to you all???.
>
> Kathy
>
>

I find it hard to imagine that the new hammers don't need lacquer. Maybe they may not need *additional* lacquer but the hammers are now dipped in a lacquer solution before they are sent out or installed unless otherwise requested. There can be quite a variation in how they come out depending, presumably, on either the strength of the solution or the variability of the pressing. I have found on new Steinways every variation in the Goldilocks story: too hard, too soft and just right.

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 17:05
From: Kathy Smith
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Hi, Don,

I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.

All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound "out of the box" was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and "woofy" sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.

The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.

The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a "drop".)

Like Horace said, I'm finding that the new hammers still require a lot of "attention before being ready for prime time" but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.

I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that's possible. Of the three sets I've installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you've got. Maybe I've been lucky.

I've also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it's used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it's suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that's perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I'm marking my cans, just in case.

Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, "I'm not likely to change my approach". That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.

Thanks, everyone, best to you all….

Kathy

Hi, David,

On 1/19/2017 9:33 PM, David Love via Piano Technicians Guild wrote:
> Please do not forward this message due to Auto Login.
>
> I find it hard to imagine that the new hammers don't need lacquer. Maybe they may not need *additional* lacquer but the hammers are now dipped in a lacquer solution before they are sent out or installed unless otherwise requested. There can be quite a variation in how they come out depending, presumably, on either the strength of the solution or the variability of the pressing. I have found on new Steinways every variation in the Goldilocks story: too hard, too soft and just right.

I don't disagree with you, because your experience precisely my own
experience. That said, the new hammers are smaller, lighter, and, much
more readily easily voiced that previous iterations.

The dipping is something that has been going on since (at least) WWII.
While the process has no doubt changed at least some what, my
observation (the last time I was at the factory in 1995) was the same as
it had been in 1969 (on my very first trip there.

That is, the hammers were first "dipped" in a 10% lacquer solution
(before cutting...basically fresh out of the cauls). Then, as the
individual hammers were separated from the "strip", they got another
(fairly hefty) "spritz" of 10% just as they went under the knife. Note
that they were, as yet, totally unshaped, having just been released from
the cauls and then cut apart. Further shaping didn't really happen
until the initial setup of the individual instrument, when the initial
shaping was done; and, everything else was left to what they then called
"Final Tone Regulation" (much more complex than that glib term implies).

Over the intervening decades, there have (all-too-obviously) been many
changes to various manufacturing procedures (to say nothing of design
changes), which have, on net, generally detracted from what a given
end-technician might be able to do. These latest version of the hammers
is the most positive thing I've seen in production there for nearly 20
years.

In any event, the point of this is that "dipping" has been around for a
(comparatively) long time, now...certainly longer than most practicing
technicians have memories (with a few notable exceptions...HI, Ted!!)

Sorry that the rest has to wait.

Kind regards.

Horace


>
> ------------------------------
> David Love RPT
> www.davidlovepianos.com
> davidlovepianos@comcast.net
> 415 407 8320
> ------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------
> Original Message:
> Sent: 01-19-2017 17:05
> From: Kathy Smith
> Subject: NY Steinway Hammers
>
> Hi, Don,
>
> I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.
>
> All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound "out of the box" was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and "woofy" sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.
>
> The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.
>
> The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a "drop".)
>
> Like Horace said, I'm finding that the new hammers still require a lot of "attention before being ready for prime time" but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.
>
> I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that's possible. Of the three sets I've installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you've got. Maybe I've been lucky.
>
> I've also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it's used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it's suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that's perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I'm marking my cans, just in case.
>
> Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, "I'm not likely to change my approach". That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.
>
> Thanks, everyone, best to you all???.
>
> Kathy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reply to Sender : http://my.ptg.org/eGroups/PostReply/?GroupId=49&SenderKey=c6bec9da-82ac-413c-b761-8ffbb84d2e9a&MID=670218&MDATE=756%253c456475&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved
>
> Reply to Discussion : http://my.ptg.org/eGroups/PostReply/?GroupId=49&MID=670218&MDATE=756%253c456475&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved
>
>
>
> You are subscribed to "CAUT" as hgreeley@sonic.net. To change your subscriptions, go to http://my.ptg.org/preferences?section=Subscriptions&MDATE=756%253c456475&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved. To unsubscribe from this community discussion, go to http://my.ptg.org/HigherLogic/eGroups/Unsubscribe.aspx?UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved&GroupKey=e03c48ae-bba7-4045-9d5f-c5e4b7b46b15.
>


Original Message------

I find it hard to imagine that the new hammers don't need lacquer. Maybe they may not need *additional* lacquer but the hammers are now dipped in a lacquer solution before they are sent out or installed unless otherwise requested. There can be quite a variation in how they come out depending, presumably, on either the strength of the solution or the variability of the pressing. I have found on new Steinways every variation in the Goldilocks story: too hard, too soft and just right.

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Hi Horace:

Smaller (less bulky) and lighter is definitely better, especially in the treble section where excess mass and bulk can create serious problems in producing (or not absorbing) high frequency energy, and additional applications of lacquer are usually counterproductive.  I think bulk is especially important (felt thickness), as more bulk (and mass) produces longer hammer string contact time (hsct) which is especially critical in the treble section due to the phenomenon of the period coinciding with hsct eliminating those frequencies.  Hammers that have too much bulk should be heavily filed first before additional applications of lacquer.  I find the ideal felt thickness around 4-6 mm in the 1st capo section, proportionately less in the second.  Of course it's better if they are made that way rather than filed to that dimension but in my experience they rarely are.  Less bulk, mass, and a felt which is more resilient due to less lacquer will generate much greater clarity through the entire scale.  

As I've mentioned in previous posts on a related subject, I order these types of hammers (cold pressed) from Ronsen with very specific dimensions in order to eliminate the need for that type of filing.  The hammers don't require any lacquer at all.  Of course they are a different type of felt than Steinway uses (I use Wurzen felt for Steinway hammers,generally), denser and with better fiber integration and can be stretched tighter creating a firmer but more flexible hammer without the need for dipping.  

While I agree that the old Steinway method of dipping was as you mentioned, in the past several years it seems that an additional dip has been added.  Presumably this was to try and remove the variability of Steinway store prep work which ranged from no applications to excessive ones, or worse, excessive ones followed by the use of such awful things as fabric softeners.  

Best

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-20-2017 00:50
From: Horace Greeley
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Hi, David,

On 1/19/2017 9:33 PM, David Love via Piano Technicians Guild wrote:
> Please do not forward this message due to Auto Login.
>
> I find it hard to imagine that the new hammers don't need lacquer. Maybe they may not need *additional* lacquer but the hammers are now dipped in a lacquer solution before they are sent out or installed unless otherwise requested. There can be quite a variation in how they come out depending, presumably, on either the strength of the solution or the variability of the pressing. I have found on new Steinways every variation in the Goldilocks story: too hard, too soft and just right.

I don't disagree with you, because your experience precisely my own
experience. That said, the new hammers are smaller, lighter, and, much
more readily easily voiced that previous iterations.

The dipping is something that has been going on since (at least) WWII.
While the process has no doubt changed at least some what, my
observation (the last time I was at the factory in 1995) was the same as
it had been in 1969 (on my very first trip there.

That is, the hammers were first "dipped" in a 10% lacquer solution
(before cutting...basically fresh out of the cauls). Then, as the
individual hammers were separated from the "strip", they got another
(fairly hefty) "spritz" of 10% just as they went under the knife. Note
that they were, as yet, totally unshaped, having just been released from
the cauls and then cut apart. Further shaping didn't really happen
until the initial setup of the individual instrument, when the initial
shaping was done; and, everything else was left to what they then called
"Final Tone Regulation" (much more complex than that glib term implies).

Over the intervening decades, there have (all-too-obviously) been many
changes to various manufacturing procedures (to say nothing of design
changes), which have, on net, generally detracted from what a given
end-technician might be able to do. These latest version of the hammers
is the most positive thing I've seen in production there for nearly 20
years.

In any event, the point of this is that "dipping" has been around for a
(comparatively) long time, now...certainly longer than most practicing
technicians have memories (with a few notable exceptions...HI, Ted!!)

Sorry that the rest has to wait.

Kind regards.

Horace


>
> ------------------------------
> David Love RPT
> www.davidlovepianos.com
> davidlovepianos@comcast.net
> 415 407 8320
> ------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------
> Original Message:
> Sent: 01-19-2017 17:05
> From: Kathy Smith
> Subject: NY Steinway Hammers
>
> Hi, Don,
>
> I have replaced 3 sets of Steinway New York hammers in the past year. One 20-year-old D, a concert hall backup piano, got replacement hammers a year ago, and was also re-strung. Another 4-year-old D in heavy concert use got a new set in September, and I did a B for a local private college just two weeks ago.
>
> All three sets worked very well for me, with hardly any lacquer. The B, in a teaching studio, had none at all. The sound "out of the box" was clear and nice, not huge, but not that muffled and "woofy" sound we associate with the old hammers, which required a lot of lacquer. It was also in a smallish studio with a teacher who prefers a little sweeter sound. After several tunings and some use we will check again; it may need a little but if so, hardly any. With a little in the shoulders, it could go onto a small stage easily. The smaller denser size is also presenting with decent weight at the keys, unlike the older bigger ones, so no heroic efforts needed to make touch feel normal. So far.
>
> The older D a year ago, after careful hammer alignment/travel/burn-in and fit, only needed a little juice in the bass singles and the upper shoulders in one treble octave. It seems to be doing fine. It is in varied use, including chamber series, but no huge classical concertos.
>
> The D done just this fall is a primary piano in a 1500-seat performance venue at a private college. The space has a little faculty and student use but is mainly used by traveling orchestras and groups and artists, many of world renown.. The NY and the extra-nice Hamburg are 4 years old, and at the start, the NY suffered by comparison. The original set of hammers was a little hard to work with and wore out quickly. The Hamburg was selected about 70/30 over the NY for the first several years. Now, since the new hammers, the NY is being selected about 50/50 over the Hamburg, including visiting artists' solo recitals and concerto use with orchestras. The hammers took the usual time to do travel and fit, but hardly used any lacquer at all. A little in the shoulders, and over time, some very tiny amounts exactly in the string cuts. (Not even what could be described as a "drop".)
>
> Like Horace said, I'm finding that the new hammers still require a lot of "attention before being ready for prime time" but for me, that was mostly spent on travel and alignment and hammer fit, but not multiple visits with the lacquer bottle. When being fussy, that also included a light shaping, more of a polishing of the hammers with fine paper, especially over the shoulders.
>
> I find some new pianos, especially the smaller models at the local dealership, can still have a quiet, muffled sound before they get prep, so I know that's possible. Of the three sets I've installed, I was very happy. I suspect there still might be variability, which is worrisome due to the amount of time it takes to install and see what you've got. Maybe I've been lucky.
>
> I've also gotten lazy recently, I got tired of mixing my own lacquer and having it turn yellow before it's used up. I started using the Wurdack from Steinway, and it's suiting me just fine. It comes in quart sizes so I can have fresh stuff that's perfectly clear, and I use it up before it gets old. It is said to have a 12-18 month shelf life, so I'm marking my cans, just in case.
>
> Hope that helps. Like Horace said (sorry to keep quoting you, old friend) - as long as artists remain happy, "I'm not likely to change my approach". That thought is in the general, not the particular, if that makes sense. I have picked lip many valuable ideas from this group, and am happy to keep reading everything.
>
> Thanks, everyone, best to you all???.
>
> Kathy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reply to Sender : http://my.ptg.org/eGroups/PostReply/?GroupId=49&SenderKey=c6bec9da-82ac-413c-b761-8ffbb84d2e9a&MID=670218&MDATE=756%253c456475&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved
>
> Reply to Discussion : http://my.ptg.org/eGroups/PostReply/?GroupId=49&MID=670218&MDATE=756%253c456475&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved
>
>
>
> You are subscribed to "CAUT" as hgreeley@sonic.net. To change your subscriptions, go to http://my.ptg.org/preferences?section=Subscriptions&MDATE=756%253c456475&UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved. To unsubscribe from this community discussion, go to http://my.ptg.org/HigherLogic/eGroups/Unsubscribe.aspx?UserKey=3feecf45-4a69-4cff-bbb2-fd6c7eaf0569&sKey=KeyRemoved&GroupKey=e03c48ae-bba7-4045-9d5f-c5e4b7b46b15.
>

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message------

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Thank you everyone for the replies to my question! I am feeling much more confident when the time comes to work with the new Steinway hammers.

Ryan, I agree that one should consider going to the "source." There have been many great techs at Steinway over the years. They have always been an important resource on how to approach one's work. I am very grateful for having had the opportunity to attend the seminars at the factory. However, learning from the experience of others not affiliated with Steinway is equally important. It has been my experience that following official Steinway protocol is not always the best way to go. The diversity of opinion in our profession makes our work so much more interesting and fun!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2017 15:10
From: Ryan Sowers
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Here's a useful manual in the archives on voicing NY VS Hamburg Steinways.
<top>http://my.ptg.org/viewdocument/steinway-tuning-voicing?CommunityKey=16e8f8dc-7b6a-43b3-aa35-a82288dd8cbf&tab=librarydocuments

------------------------------
ChrisChernobieff
Chernobieff Piano and Harpsichord Mfg.
Lenoir City TN
865-986-7720
chrisppff@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/ChernobieffPianoandHarpsichordMFG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2017 10:48
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Thank you everyone for the replies to my question! I am feeling much more confident when the time comes to work with the new Steinway hammers.

Ryan, I agree that one should consider going to the "source." There have been many great techs at Steinway over the years. They have always been an important resource on how to approach one's work. I am very grateful for having had the opportunity to attend the seminars at the factory. However, learning from the experience of others not affiliated with Steinway is equally important. It has been my experience that following official Steinway protocol is not always the best way to go. The diversity of opinion in our profession makes our work so much more interesting and fun!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2017 15:10
From: Ryan Sowers
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Can you clarify that link?  It didn't work for me.

------------------------------
David Skolnik
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
914-231-7565
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:08
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Here's a useful manual in the archives on voicing NY VS Hamburg Steinways.
<top>http://my.ptg.org/viewdocument/steinway-tuning-voicing?CommunityKey=16e8f8dc-7b6a-43b3-aa35-a82288dd8cbf&tab=librarydocuments

------------------------------
ChrisChernobieff
Chernobieff Piano and Harpsichord Mfg.
Lenoir City TN
865-986-7720
chrisppff@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/ChernobieffPianoandHarpsichordMFG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2017 10:48
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Thank you everyone for the replies to my question! I am feeling much more confident when the time comes to work with the new Steinway hammers.

Ryan, I agree that one should consider going to the "source." There have been many great techs at Steinway over the years. They have always been an important resource on how to approach one's work. I am very grateful for having had the opportunity to attend the seminars at the factory. However, learning from the experience of others not affiliated with Steinway is equally important. It has been my experience that following official Steinway protocol is not always the best way to go. The diversity of opinion in our profession makes our work so much more interesting and fun!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2017 15:10
From: Ryan Sowers
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

The link you sent to CAUT worked.  The one here did not.  Thanks

------------------------------
David Skolnik
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
914-231-7565
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:15
From: David Skolnik
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Can you clarify that link?  It didn't work for me.

------------------------------
David Skolnik
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
914-231-7565
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:08
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Here's a useful manual in the archives on voicing NY VS Hamburg Steinways.
<top>http://my.ptg.org/viewdocument/steinway-tuning-voicing?CommunityKey=16e8f8dc-7b6a-43b3-aa35-a82288dd8cbf&tab=librarydocuments

------------------------------
ChrisChernobieff
Chernobieff Piano and Harpsichord Mfg.
Lenoir City TN
865-986-7720
chrisppff@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/ChernobieffPianoandHarpsichordMFG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2017 10:48
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Thank you everyone for the replies to my question! I am feeling much more confident when the time comes to work with the new Steinway hammers.

Ryan, I agree that one should consider going to the "source." There have been many great techs at Steinway over the years. They have always been an important resource on how to approach one's work. I am very grateful for having had the opportunity to attend the seminars at the factory. However, learning from the experience of others not affiliated with Steinway is equally important. It has been my experience that following official Steinway protocol is not always the best way to go. The diversity of opinion in our profession makes our work so much more interesting and fun!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2017 15:10
From: Ryan Sowers
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Thanks David, Should work now,

http://my.ptg.org/viewdocument/steinway-tuning-voicing?CommunityKey=16e8f8dc-7b6a-43b3-aa35-a82288dd8cbf&tab=librarydocuments

------------------------------
ChrisChernobieff
Chernobieff Piano and Harpsichord Mfg.
Lenoir City TN
865-986-7720
chrisppff@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/ChernobieffPianoandHarpsichordMFG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:20
From: David Skolnik
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The link you sent to CAUT worked.  The one here did not.  Thanks

------------------------------
David Skolnik
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
914-231-7565
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:15
From: David Skolnik
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Can you clarify that link?  It didn't work for me.

------------------------------
David Skolnik
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
914-231-7565
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:08
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Here's a useful manual in the archives on voicing NY VS Hamburg Steinways.
<top>http://my.ptg.org/viewdocument/steinway-tuning-voicing?CommunityKey=16e8f8dc-7b6a-43b3-aa35-a82288dd8cbf&tab=librarydocuments

------------------------------
ChrisChernobieff
Chernobieff Piano and Harpsichord Mfg.
Lenoir City TN
865-986-7720
chrisppff@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/ChernobieffPianoandHarpsichordMFG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2017 10:48
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Thank you everyone for the replies to my question! I am feeling much more confident when the time comes to work with the new Steinway hammers.

Ryan, I agree that one should consider going to the "source." There have been many great techs at Steinway over the years. They have always been an important resource on how to approach one's work. I am very grateful for having had the opportunity to attend the seminars at the factory. However, learning from the experience of others not affiliated with Steinway is equally important. It has been my experience that following official Steinway protocol is not always the best way to go. The diversity of opinion in our profession makes our work so much more interesting and fun!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2017 15:10
From: Ryan Sowers
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Chris, VERY helpful resource! I should have realized there are probably other "World-Wide Technical Reference Guides" from Steinway other than just the one on "Grand Regulation".  
Are these available to download on their website? Anyone? Anyone? 

------------------------------
[Kevin] [Fortenberry] [RPT]
[Staff Techician]
[Texas Tech Univ]
[Lubbock] [TX]
[8067783962]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:34
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Thanks David, Should work now,

http://my.ptg.org/viewdocument/steinway-tuning-voicing?CommunityKey=16e8f8dc-7b6a-43b3-aa35-a82288dd8cbf&tab=librarydocuments

------------------------------
ChrisChernobieff
Chernobieff Piano and Harpsichord Mfg.
Lenoir City TN
865-986-7720
chrisppff@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/ChernobieffPianoandHarpsichordMFG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:20
From: David Skolnik
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The link you sent to CAUT worked.  The one here did not.  Thanks

------------------------------
David Skolnik
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
914-231-7565
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:15
From: David Skolnik
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Can you clarify that link?  It didn't work for me.

------------------------------
David Skolnik
Hastings-on-Hudson NY
914-231-7565
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2017 23:08
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Here's a useful manual in the archives on voicing NY VS Hamburg Steinways.
<top>http://my.ptg.org/viewdocument/steinway-tuning-voicing?CommunityKey=16e8f8dc-7b6a-43b3-aa35-a82288dd8cbf&tab=librarydocuments

------------------------------
ChrisChernobieff
Chernobieff Piano and Harpsichord Mfg.
Lenoir City TN
865-986-7720
chrisppff@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/ChernobieffPianoandHarpsichordMFG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2017 10:48
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Thank you everyone for the replies to my question! I am feeling much more confident when the time comes to work with the new Steinway hammers.

Ryan, I agree that one should consider going to the "source." There have been many great techs at Steinway over the years. They have always been an important resource on how to approach one's work. I am very grateful for having had the opportunity to attend the seminars at the factory. However, learning from the experience of others not affiliated with Steinway is equally important. It has been my experience that following official Steinway protocol is not always the best way to go. The diversity of opinion in our profession makes our work so much more interesting and fun!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2017 15:10
From: Ryan Sowers
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

There is a lot of worthwhile discussion on this thread. 

One thing to consider is going right to the source and talking directly with Steinway. Better yet, get on the list for the seminars - they are well worthwhile. I remember Kent Webb lamenting a bit about all these discussions and saying "We wish they'd just call us..."  

------------------------------
Ryan Sowers
Olympia WA
360-705-4160
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-19-2017 14:22
From: Donald McKechnie
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

Original Message------

Chris, VERY helpful resource! I should have realized there are probably other "World-Wide Technical Reference Guides" from Steinway other than just the one on "Grand Regulation".  
Are these available to download on their website? Anyone? Anyone? 

------------------------------
[Kevin] [Fortenberry] [RPT]
[Staff Techician]
[Texas Tech Univ]
[Lubbock] [TX]
[8067783962]
------------------------------

Kevin,
There is a "Steinway Worldwide Technical Reference Guide" from which that voicing chapter came. It is available in hard copy and electronic format from Steinway NY. Contact Kent Webb or David Kirkland to see how you can get one. They gave me a hard copy when I attended the Academy program several years ago. I think they probably sell it for $50-100, but don't remember.

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 02:02
From: Michael Gamble
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin - the only other Steinway oriented book I know of is by Max Matthias aptly named: "Steinway Service Manual" published by Verlag Erwin Bochinsky  ISBN 3-923639-15-5  But, of course, you'd have to buy the 179pp book. Even though it's geared toward the Hamburger S&S and half is in German it's worth its weight in gold with many references at the end. Gregor Heller has an advert in it as well . . .     Michael   UK . 

It is now on a flash drive available from Steinway. You will an account to purchase it

------------------------------
James Kelly
Pawleys Island SC
843-325-4357
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 09:36
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin,
There is a "Steinway Worldwide Technical Reference Guide" from which that voicing chapter came. It is available in hard copy and electronic format from Steinway NY. Contact Kent Webb or David Kirkland to see how you can get one. They gave me a hard copy when I attended the Academy program several years ago. I think they probably sell it for $50-100, but don't remember.

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 02:02
From: Michael Gamble
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin - the only other Steinway oriented book I know of is by Max Matthias aptly named: "Steinway Service Manual" published by Verlag Erwin Bochinsky  ISBN 3-923639-15-5  But, of course, you'd have to buy the 179pp book. Even though it's geared toward the Hamburger S&S and half is in German it's worth its weight in gold with many references at the end. Gregor Heller has an advert in it as well . . .     Michael   UK . 

The question, "Why do we put hardener on a soft NY Steinway hammer" is left unanswered here. As for technical information this literature is all very helpful but tells us very little about the purpose for hardener and will not dispel confusion about the goals NY Steinway had in creating the sound it did with hammer hardener that in part distinquished it from Hamburg so well.

Part of the communication problem one will consistently run into on this site is exemplified by this very discussion and presentation of technical information. What is meant to be drawn from such instructions is that it will produce a result that we have somehow not achieved adding hardener to old style soft NY Steinway hammers previously without such technical know-how, and that by creating a forum devoted to communicating technical information like this, somehow we will find the results pleasing if we just adapt our technique to the system provided. This is short-sighted, and wrong. If following these instructions to the letter on old style NY Steinway hammers, many here will be just as disappointed with the sound as they always were because the purpose for using hardeners is philosophical, not technical.

Franz Mohr clearly described his disillusionment with war in his magnum opus. Horowitz did not care that the pacifist Leo Tolstoy did not want the Russian Orthodox Church to be involved with the state. Neither were as concerned about aesthetics in art as many of us are.

For Tolstoy, what made something art was not beauty, but the evocation of feeling, or emotion, by the object. Tolstoy railed against Kant and Baumgarten for insisting art must produce pleasure, and never produce pain, that it is always beautiful, and never ugly.

The reason people don't understand how to add hardener to hammers is not a technical problem. It is a philosophical problem about the artistic justification for doing so. It is-with or without recognizing it as such-an anti-Kantian repugnance at the idea that art must be pleasurable, and that it has to be beautiful. Kant went so far to say that beauty was a symbol of the morally good. Tolstoy found this to be a symbol of Greek Western decadence. 

You will learn more about adding hardener to Steinway hammers from Tolstoy than this manual. How can such a technical system help someone without understanding the goal?

What a bunch of piano geeks.

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 22:35
From: James Kelly
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It is now on a flash drive available from Steinway. You will an account to purchase it

------------------------------
James Kelly
Pawleys Island SC
843-325-4357
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 09:36
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin,
There is a "Steinway Worldwide Technical Reference Guide" from which that voicing chapter came. It is available in hard copy and electronic format from Steinway NY. Contact Kent Webb or David Kirkland to see how you can get one. They gave me a hard copy when I attended the Academy program several years ago. I think they probably sell it for $50-100, but don't remember.

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 02:02
From: Michael Gamble
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin - the only other Steinway oriented book I know of is by Max Matthias aptly named: "Steinway Service Manual" published by Verlag Erwin Bochinsky  ISBN 3-923639-15-5  But, of course, you'd have to buy the 179pp book. Even though it's geared toward the Hamburger S&S and half is in German it's worth its weight in gold with many references at the end. Gregor Heller has an advert in it as well . . .     Michael   UK . 

E.g., I've programmed the piece. Mostly it upsets people...

https://youtu.be/7ClDFmFmr0k

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-27-2017 03:28
From: Benjamin Sloane
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The question, "Why do we put hardener on a soft NY Steinway hammer" is left unanswered here. As for technical information this literature is all very helpful but tells us very little about the purpose for hardener and will not dispel confusion about the goals NY Steinway had in creating the sound it did with hammer hardener that in part distinquished it from Hamburg so well.

Part of the communication problem one will consistently run into on this site is exemplified by this very discussion and presentation of technical information. What is meant to be drawn from such instructions is that it will produce a result that we have somehow not achieved adding hardener to old style soft NY Steinway hammers previously without such technical know-how, and that by creating a forum devoted to communicating technical information like this, somehow we will find the results pleasing if we just adapt our technique to the system provided. This is short-sighted, and wrong. If following these instructions to the letter on old style NY Steinway hammers, many here will be just as disappointed with the sound as they always were because the purpose for using hardeners is philosophical, not technical.

Franz Mohr clearly described his disillusionment with war in his magnum opus. Horowitz did not care that the pacifist Leo Tolstoy did not want the Russian Orthodox Church to be involved with the state. Neither were as concerned about aesthetics in art as many of us are.

For Tolstoy, what made something art was not beauty, but the evocation of feeling, or emotion, by the object. Tolstoy railed against Kant and Baumgarten for insisting art must produce pleasure, and never produce pain, that it is always beautiful, and never ugly.

The reason people don't understand how to add hardener to hammers is not a technical problem. It is a philosophical problem about the artistic justification for doing so. It is-with or without recognizing it as such-an anti-Kantian repugnance at the idea that art must be pleasurable, and that it has to be beautiful. Kant went so far to say that beauty was a symbol of the morally good. Tolstoy found this to be a symbol of Greek Western decadence. 

You will learn more about adding hardener to Steinway hammers from Tolstoy than this manual. How can such a technical system help someone without understanding the goal?

What a bunch of piano geeks.

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 22:35
From: James Kelly
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It is now on a flash drive available from Steinway. You will an account to purchase it

------------------------------
James Kelly
Pawleys Island SC
843-325-4357
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 09:36
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin,
There is a "Steinway Worldwide Technical Reference Guide" from which that voicing chapter came. It is available in hard copy and electronic format from Steinway NY. Contact Kent Webb or David Kirkland to see how you can get one. They gave me a hard copy when I attended the Academy program several years ago. I think they probably sell it for $50-100, but don't remember.

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 02:02
From: Michael Gamble
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin - the only other Steinway oriented book I know of is by Max Matthias aptly named: "Steinway Service Manual" published by Verlag Erwin Bochinsky  ISBN 3-923639-15-5  But, of course, you'd have to buy the 179pp book. Even though it's geared toward the Hamburger S&S and half is in German it's worth its weight in gold with many references at the end. Gregor Heller has an advert in it as well . . .     Michael   UK . 

We use lacquer to stiffen the felt.

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-27-2017 03:28
From: Benjamin Sloane
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The question, "Why do we put hardener on a soft NY Steinway hammer" is left unanswered here. As for technical information this literature is all very helpful but tells us very little about the purpose for hardener and will not dispel confusion about the goals NY Steinway had in creating the sound it did with hammer hardener that in part distinquished it from Hamburg so well.

Part of the communication problem one will consistently run into on this site is exemplified by this very discussion and presentation of technical information. What is meant to be drawn from such instructions is that it will produce a result that we have somehow not achieved adding hardener to old style soft NY Steinway hammers previously without such technical know-how, and that by creating a forum devoted to communicating technical information like this, somehow we will find the results pleasing if we just adapt our technique to the system provided. This is short-sighted, and wrong. If following these instructions to the letter on old style NY Steinway hammers, many here will be just as disappointed with the sound as they always were because the purpose for using hardeners is philosophical, not technical.

Franz Mohr clearly described his disillusionment with war in his magnum opus. Horowitz did not care that the pacifist Leo Tolstoy did not want the Russian Orthodox Church to be involved with the state. Neither were as concerned about aesthetics in art as many of us are.

For Tolstoy, what made something art was not beauty, but the evocation of feeling, or emotion, by the object. Tolstoy railed against Kant and Baumgarten for insisting art must produce pleasure, and never produce pain, that it is always beautiful, and never ugly.

The reason people don't understand how to add hardener to hammers is not a technical problem. It is a philosophical problem about the artistic justification for doing so. It is-with or without recognizing it as such-an anti-Kantian repugnance at the idea that art must be pleasurable, and that it has to be beautiful. Kant went so far to say that beauty was a symbol of the morally good. Tolstoy found this to be a symbol of Greek Western decadence. 

You will learn more about adding hardener to Steinway hammers from Tolstoy than this manual. How can such a technical system help someone without understanding the goal?

What a bunch of piano geeks.

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 22:35
From: James Kelly
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It is now on a flash drive available from Steinway. You will an account to purchase it

------------------------------
James Kelly
Pawleys Island SC
843-325-4357
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 09:36
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin,
There is a "Steinway Worldwide Technical Reference Guide" from which that voicing chapter came. It is available in hard copy and electronic format from Steinway NY. Contact Kent Webb or David Kirkland to see how you can get one. They gave me a hard copy when I attended the Academy program several years ago. I think they probably sell it for $50-100, but don't remember.

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 02:02
From: Michael Gamble
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin - the only other Steinway oriented book I know of is by Max Matthias aptly named: "Steinway Service Manual" published by Verlag Erwin Bochinsky  ISBN 3-923639-15-5  But, of course, you'd have to buy the 179pp book. Even though it's geared toward the Hamburger S&S and half is in German it's worth its weight in gold with many references at the end. Gregor Heller has an advert in it as well . . .     Michael   UK . 

David,

Artists do not decide to hire us in order to make hammer felt harder, and strictly practice a mechanical art. There are plenty of aspects of the pianist's art that are purely mechanical as well. Artists hire us to participate in the process of producing beautiful art also. That, Kant claimed, takes a genius. 

You may have an image in your mind that certainly would bring pleasure to a viewer or be considered art for some other reason. Yes, without the mechanical ability to get that image on a canvas, your ability to imagine such a thing will be useless. That is why we spend so much time talking about tuning hammer technique. 

And that is where the conversation stops with electronic tuning devices, a process that in neglecting the beautiful process of tuning, perhaps leads to other habits of mind that are reflected in hyperbole concerning the mechanical challenges involved with voicing. It is mechanical, not beautiful art, to use an ETD. 

We do not have the luxury of stopping there with voicing, and reducing it to a mechanical technique. We actually have to listen. Nobody is deciding what is beautiful for us or if we should desire the beautiful as we develop the mechanical ability to harden a hammer. It requires the imagination and vision to create a beautiful thing in that process. That requires investigation of subject matter that goes beyond technical information. I think the PTG is smarter than that and can have a better dialogue.  

It is the difference between playing scales and making music. 

Thank you for teaching us to play a scale..

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-28-2017 00:48
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

We use lacquer to stiffen the felt.

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-27-2017 03:28
From: Benjamin Sloane
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The question, "Why do we put hardener on a soft NY Steinway hammer" is left unanswered here. As for technical information this literature is all very helpful but tells us very little about the purpose for hardener and will not dispel confusion about the goals NY Steinway had in creating the sound it did with hammer hardener that in part distinquished it from Hamburg so well.

Part of the communication problem one will consistently run into on this site is exemplified by this very discussion and presentation of technical information. What is meant to be drawn from such instructions is that it will produce a result that we have somehow not achieved adding hardener to old style soft NY Steinway hammers previously without such technical know-how, and that by creating a forum devoted to communicating technical information like this, somehow we will find the results pleasing if we just adapt our technique to the system provided. This is short-sighted, and wrong. If following these instructions to the letter on old style NY Steinway hammers, many here will be just as disappointed with the sound as they always were because the purpose for using hardeners is philosophical, not technical.

Franz Mohr clearly described his disillusionment with war in his magnum opus. Horowitz did not care that the pacifist Leo Tolstoy did not want the Russian Orthodox Church to be involved with the state. Neither were as concerned about aesthetics in art as many of us are.

For Tolstoy, what made something art was not beauty, but the evocation of feeling, or emotion, by the object. Tolstoy railed against Kant and Baumgarten for insisting art must produce pleasure, and never produce pain, that it is always beautiful, and never ugly.

The reason people don't understand how to add hardener to hammers is not a technical problem. It is a philosophical problem about the artistic justification for doing so. It is-with or without recognizing it as such-an anti-Kantian repugnance at the idea that art must be pleasurable, and that it has to be beautiful. Kant went so far to say that beauty was a symbol of the morally good. Tolstoy found this to be a symbol of Greek Western decadence. 

You will learn more about adding hardener to Steinway hammers from Tolstoy than this manual. How can such a technical system help someone without understanding the goal?

What a bunch of piano geeks.

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 22:35
From: James Kelly
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It is now on a flash drive available from Steinway. You will an account to purchase it

------------------------------
James Kelly
Pawleys Island SC
843-325-4357
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 09:36
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin,
There is a "Steinway Worldwide Technical Reference Guide" from which that voicing chapter came. It is available in hard copy and electronic format from Steinway NY. Contact Kent Webb or David Kirkland to see how you can get one. They gave me a hard copy when I attended the Academy program several years ago. I think they probably sell it for $50-100, but don't remember.

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-26-2017 02:02
From: Michael Gamble
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Kevin - the only other Steinway oriented book I know of is by Max Matthias aptly named: "Steinway Service Manual" published by Verlag Erwin Bochinsky  ISBN 3-923639-15-5  But, of course, you'd have to buy the 179pp book. Even though it's geared toward the Hamburger S&S and half is in German it's worth its weight in gold with many references at the end. Gregor Heller has an advert in it as well . . .     Michael   UK . 

Original Message------

David,

Artists do not decide to hire us in order to make hammer felt harder, and strictly practice a mechanical art. There are plenty of aspects of the pianist's art that are purely mechanical as well. Artists hire us to participate in the process of producing beautiful art also. That, Kant claimed, takes a genius. 

You may have an image in your mind that certainly would bring pleasure to a viewer or be considered art for some other reason. Yes, without the mechanical ability to get that image on a canvas, your ability to imagine such a thing will be useless. That is why we spend so much time talking about tuning hammer technique. 

And that is where the conversation stops with electronic tuning devices, a process that in neglecting the beautiful process of tuning, perhaps leads to other habits of mind that are reflected in hyperbole concerning the mechanical challenges involved with voicing. It is mechanical, not beautiful art, to use an ETD. 

We do not have the luxury of stopping there with voicing, and reducing it to a mechanical technique. We actually have to listen. Nobody is deciding what is beautiful for us or if we should desire the beautiful as we develop the mechanical ability to harden a hammer. It requires the imagination and vision to create a beautiful thing in that process. That requires investigation of subject matter that goes beyond technical information. I think the PTG is smarter than that and can have a better dialogue.  

It is the difference between playing scales and making music. 

Thank you for teaching us to play a scale..

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

You don't add lacquer to change the sound of the piano?

It will stiffen the felt but not change the sound? Sorry Dave, but this is more than splitting hairs...

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-29-2017 12:08
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The answer to why we put lacquer on hammers is to stiffen the felt.  That's what it does. 

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

Well Benjamin, you are a very interesting read. We are in the music part of the art business. The base tonal values for musical expression are rooted in the human voice, but not limited to it alone. Music is emotional language. All humans have the ability to feel the same emotions. Such is our fate.

So what we piano technicians are responsible for is making and adjusting the mechanics of the piano so as to maximize musical utility. Good and bad taste are not arbitrary values, they are rooted in the way our ears and minds create and experience musical expression. Often, when I confront people who propose that musical taste is arbitrary I resort to expounding if that is so then you believe in existentialist nihilism. That none of us have a truly shared experience. That we are all alone as individuals. I reject that frame!

However, hammers are dampers. The two elements that control the damping character of a hammer are the mass of the hammer in proportion to the periodicity of the string, and the non-linear spring rate of the felt. Lacquer mostly changes the spring rate. (It does add a very little mass).

------------------------------
Edward McMorrow
Edmonds WA
425-299-3431
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-29-2017 12:51
From: Benjamin Sloane
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

You don't add lacquer to change the sound of the piano?

It will stiffen the felt but not change the sound? Sorry Dave, but this is more than splitting hairs...

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-29-2017 12:08
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The answer to why we put lacquer on hammers is to stiffen the felt.  That's what it does. 

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-29-2017 22:32
From: Edward McMorrow
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Well Benjamin, you are a very interesting read. We are in the music part of the art business. The base tonal values for musical expression are rooted in the human voice, but not limited to it alone. Music is emotional language. All humans have the ability to feel the same emotions. Such is our fate.

So what we piano technicians are responsible for is making and adjusting the mechanics of the piano so as to maximize musical utility. Good and bad taste are not arbitrary values, they are rooted in the way our ears and minds create and experience musical expression. Often, when I confront people who propose that musical taste is arbitrary I resort to expounding if that is so then you believe in existentialist nihilism. That none of us have a truly shared experience. That we are all alone as individuals. I reject that frame!

However, hammers are dampers. The two elements that control the damping character of a hammer are the mass of the hammer in proportion to the periodicity of the string, and the non-linear spring rate of the felt. Lacquer mostly changes the spring rate. (It does add a very little mass).

------------------------------
Edward McMorrow
Edmonds WA
425-299-3431
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-29-2017 12:51
From: Benjamin Sloane
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

You don't add lacquer to change the sound of the piano?

It will stiffen the felt but not change the sound? Sorry Dave, but this is more than splitting hairs...

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 01-29-2017 12:08
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The answer to why we put lacquer on hammers is to stiffen the felt.  That's what it does. 

 

David Love

www.davidlovepianos.com

 

I think it's important. I have two theories.

First, it's important because of lacquer noise. With wear, as the strike point widens and compresses, lacquer that leaches to the shoulder tends to produce noise. A narrower strike point minimizes that.

Second, since lacquer reduces the coefficient of restitution, how fast the hammer regains its original shape after compression, harder blows will tend to result in longer hammer string contact time and filter high partial development more than hammers with a higher coefficient. A narrower strike point in that case, will help produce more high partial energy on harder blows, which is what you want. 

Better is to have an unadulterated hammer with a high coefficient of restitution and natural spring rate that controls energy transfer effectively at all dynamic levels. It's better if the hammer comes that way out of the press rather than having to try and achieve that with either lots of needling or applications of lacquer since both will compromise the integrity of the hammer's restorative properties.

BTW, filing a non lacquered hammer to a pointed shape when the hammer shape is not naturally pointed means you're filing through the tensioned layers of felt and effectively leaving the crown of the hammer unsupported. It ruins the hammer. The lacquer binds the felt together and allows you to pretty much file it to whatever shape you want with relative impunity. For non lacquered hammers you should always preserve the original shape.


------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-02-2017 16:04
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

 

David,

Your last paragraph kind of sums up what I was getting at. If you were to take a new Ronsen hammer with Weickert or Wurzen felt and shape it as per Steinway published specs it would be a disaster, unless of course you fill it up with lacquer, and then what would be the point of using those hammers? 

So, If we are going to change our hammer spec then we need to accept the fact that the instrument may no longer sound as it was "intended" to. Maybe it will be "better", but that is fraught with opinion. Personally I very much like Ronsen hammers...

Is there any sense in treating a non-Steinway hammer as if it were a Steinway hammer?  I am curious.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:05
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I think it's important. I have two theories.

First, it's important because of lacquer noise. With wear, as the strike point widens and compresses, lacquer that leaches to the shoulder tends to produce noise. A narrower strike point minimizes that.

Second, since lacquer reduces the coefficient of restitution, how fast the hammer regains its original shape after compression, harder blows will tend to result in longer hammer string contact time and filter high partial development more than hammers with a higher coefficient. A narrower strike point in that case, will help produce more high partial energy on harder blows, which is what you want. 

Better is to have an unadulterated hammer with a high coefficient of restitution and natural spring rate that controls energy transfer effectively at all dynamic levels. It's better if the hammer comes that way out of the press rather than having to try and achieve that with either lots of needling or applications of lacquer since both will compromise the integrity of the hammer's restorative properties.

BTW, filing a non lacquered hammer to a pointed shape when the hammer shape is not naturally pointed means you're filing through the tensioned layers of felt and effectively leaving the crown of the hammer unsupported. It ruins the hammer. The lacquer binds the felt together and allows you to pretty much file it to whatever shape you want with relative impunity. For non lacquered hammers you should always preserve the original shape.


------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-02-2017 16:04
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

 

It raises several questions.  

What sound was intended?  
I don't think the current Steinway hammer conforms to the original hammers at all.  The original hammers (up until about 1937) where a different felt, more like the current Weickert felt, a different weight and a different pressing and received a different treatment.  So when we discuss the original design of the instrument and consider that the design was intended to match string scale, soundboard design and hammer design, then we might conclude that one of those components no longer conforms to the original design.  The original hammer pre 1937 tended to much more round btw.  Filing the hammer to a point seems to have come about more recently and seems to coincide with the use of lacquer.  

Should we treat a non-Steinway hammer like a Steinway hammer?
It depends on the hammer.  If you take a Renner Blue and file it to a point you'll get something quite different than Renner intended and it won't sound like a Steinway hammer.  Interestingly, by filing that hammer to a point you will effectively remove tension from the crown of the hammer, deadening it somewhat, and that can be effective (though not recommended) for killing an overly bright hammer.  In the case of Ronsen, a Bacon felt hammer will certainly need lacquer and once lacquered you can treat it just like a Steinway hammer and shape it as you wish.  In this case I'd probably follow the Steinway protocol.  If you order a very large, say 16 lb, hammer from Weickert or Wurzen hammer you will likely have to add some lacquer depending on the set and the piano.  If you order a 14 lb hammer it will depend on the specific set and the dimensions that are achieved.  If you follow the low profile protocol that I employ with them (I have specific felt thickness dimensions which I ask Ray to target--and he does an excellent job there) then I have not found that lacquer is needed (on Wurzen felt, Weickert felt is less predictable for some reason in this respect) and so I maintain the original shape and, in fact, ask Ray to maintain the original shape when the set comes out of the press as much as possible when they do their standard post pressing filing.  I don't like them to be filed very much.  If you are using an Abel hammer you will not want to add lacquer to any of their hammers (that I have experienced) and so you will want to retain the original shape. 

Ultimately how the hammer responds will depend on the belly of the piano.  If you had to boil down what we do as voicers to one simple description it would be we match the impedance characteristics of the belly to the hammer.  That takes into account both the attack sound and the sustain envelope and the partials that remain present after attack.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 08:28
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

David,

Your last paragraph kind of sums up what I was getting at. If you were to take a new Ronsen hammer with Weickert or Wurzen felt and shape it as per Steinway published specs it would be a disaster, unless of course you fill it up with lacquer, and then what would be the point of using those hammers? 

So, If we are going to change our hammer spec then we need to accept the fact that the instrument may no longer sound as it was "intended" to. Maybe it will be "better", but that is fraught with opinion. Personally I very much like Ronsen hammers...

Is there any sense in treating a non-Steinway hammer as if it were a Steinway hammer?  I am curious.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:05
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I think it's important. I have two theories.

First, it's important because of lacquer noise. With wear, as the strike point widens and compresses, lacquer that leaches to the shoulder tends to produce noise. A narrower strike point minimizes that.

Second, since lacquer reduces the coefficient of restitution, how fast the hammer regains its original shape after compression, harder blows will tend to result in longer hammer string contact time and filter high partial development more than hammers with a higher coefficient. A narrower strike point in that case, will help produce more high partial energy on harder blows, which is what you want. 

Better is to have an unadulterated hammer with a high coefficient of restitution and natural spring rate that controls energy transfer effectively at all dynamic levels. It's better if the hammer comes that way out of the press rather than having to try and achieve that with either lots of needling or applications of lacquer since both will compromise the integrity of the hammer's restorative properties.

BTW, filing a non lacquered hammer to a pointed shape when the hammer shape is not naturally pointed means you're filing through the tensioned layers of felt and effectively leaving the crown of the hammer unsupported. It ruins the hammer. The lacquer binds the felt together and allows you to pretty much file it to whatever shape you want with relative impunity. For non lacquered hammers you should always preserve the original shape.


------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-02-2017 16:04
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

 

I'm not clear that there is necessarily that much mechanical difference between lacquered and unlacquered hammers when it comes to filing to a point. That is, I think you also lose tension across the top when you file lacquered hammers, and that that has a significant effect on the tone. The actual results will vary depending how much lacquer.

If you use a more minimal amount (say one dose of the recommended 3% solids solution), the effect of such sharpening - removing felt from the upper shoulders, and thereby losing much of the integrity of the upper layers of felt stretched across the crown - will deaden tone somewhat and lose tonal gradient. Of course, you can then add more lacquer and brighten it back up, but you won't get back tonal gradient.

With a more heavily lacquered hammer, the difference will be less noticeable in terms of "deadening," though it will remove some of the really harsh sound on hard blows and give somewhat more clarity and focus, but you are mostly stuck with a small range of tone color, mostly limited to what you do in surface work.

Bottom line is that I am not a fan of sharpening, myself. I know a lot of people say they get good results by creating the Steinway egg shape. That hasn't been my experience, but then I do use pretty minimal lacquer on the Steinway produced hammers I care for, and I treat them much as I would treat other hammers, doing the same sort of opening of shoulders and so forth.

I think there is a pretty broad range of what "lacquered hammer" can mean. A wee spritz (like a drop on each string groove) to give attack a bit of zing it was missing is a long way from hammers that have been repeated saturated with too heavy a solution. And there are a lot of people putting far too much lacquer in hammers, largely due to the bad communication over many years (the widely publicized doctrine of 3:1 solution without the specification of 12% solids being the worst culprit - the Steinway techs were reporting accurately what they did, but they were using lacquer out of the spray booth, already thinned by half for spraying).

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 13:22
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It raises several questions.  

What sound was intended?  
I don't think the current Steinway hammer conforms to the original hammers at all.  The original hammers (up until about 1937) where a different felt, more like the current Weickert felt, a different weight and a different pressing and received a different treatment.  So when we discuss the original design of the instrument and consider that the design was intended to match string scale, soundboard design and hammer design, then we might conclude that one of those components no longer conforms to the original design.  The original hammer pre 1937 tended to much more round btw.  Filing the hammer to a point seems to have come about more recently and seems to coincide with the use of lacquer.  

Should we treat a non-Steinway hammer like a Steinway hammer?
It depends on the hammer.  If you take a Renner Blue and file it to a point you'll get something quite different than Renner intended and it won't sound like a Steinway hammer.  Interestingly, by filing that hammer to a point you will effectively remove tension from the crown of the hammer, deadening it somewhat, and that can be effective (though not recommended) for killing an overly bright hammer.  In the case of Ronsen, a Bacon felt hammer will certainly need lacquer and once lacquered you can treat it just like a Steinway hammer and shape it as you wish.  In this case I'd probably follow the Steinway protocol.  If you order a very large, say 16 lb, hammer from Weickert or Wurzen hammer you will likely have to add some lacquer depending on the set and the piano.  If you order a 14 lb hammer it will depend on the specific set and the dimensions that are achieved.  If you follow the low profile protocol that I employ with them (I have specific felt thickness dimensions which I ask Ray to target--and he does an excellent job there) then I have not found that lacquer is needed (on Wurzen felt, Weickert felt is less predictable for some reason in this respect) and so I maintain the original shape and, in fact, ask Ray to maintain the original shape when the set comes out of the press as much as possible when they do their standard post pressing filing.  I don't like them to be filed very much.  If you are using an Abel hammer you will not want to add lacquer to any of their hammers (that I have experienced) and so you will want to retain the original shape. 

Ultimately how the hammer responds will depend on the belly of the piano.  If you had to boil down what we do as voicers to one simple description it would be we match the impedance characteristics of the belly to the hammer.  That takes into account both the attack sound and the sustain envelope and the partials that remain present after attack.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 08:28
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

David,

Your last paragraph kind of sums up what I was getting at. If you were to take a new Ronsen hammer with Weickert or Wurzen felt and shape it as per Steinway published specs it would be a disaster, unless of course you fill it up with lacquer, and then what would be the point of using those hammers? 

So, If we are going to change our hammer spec then we need to accept the fact that the instrument may no longer sound as it was "intended" to. Maybe it will be "better", but that is fraught with opinion. Personally I very much like Ronsen hammers...

Is there any sense in treating a non-Steinway hammer as if it were a Steinway hammer?  I am curious.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:05
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I think it's important. I have two theories.

First, it's important because of lacquer noise. With wear, as the strike point widens and compresses, lacquer that leaches to the shoulder tends to produce noise. A narrower strike point minimizes that.

Second, since lacquer reduces the coefficient of restitution, how fast the hammer regains its original shape after compression, harder blows will tend to result in longer hammer string contact time and filter high partial development more than hammers with a higher coefficient. A narrower strike point in that case, will help produce more high partial energy on harder blows, which is what you want. 

Better is to have an unadulterated hammer with a high coefficient of restitution and natural spring rate that controls energy transfer effectively at all dynamic levels. It's better if the hammer comes that way out of the press rather than having to try and achieve that with either lots of needling or applications of lacquer since both will compromise the integrity of the hammer's restorative properties.

BTW, filing a non lacquered hammer to a pointed shape when the hammer shape is not naturally pointed means you're filing through the tensioned layers of felt and effectively leaving the crown of the hammer unsupported. It ruins the hammer. The lacquer binds the felt together and allows you to pretty much file it to whatever shape you want with relative impunity. For non lacquered hammers you should always preserve the original shape.


------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-02-2017 16:04
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

 

The mechanical differences have to be measured not just in the compression phase but in the decompression phase as well.  How the hammer rebounds off the string is largely influenced by how the hammer decompresses, or the restitution phase.  That affects the time that the hammer dwells on the string (research articles by Daniel A. Russell) which in turn affects not only the impedance characteristics of the hammer (how energy transfers to the string) but the filtering of, especially, high partial energy.  Lacquering the hammer, needling or changing the shape which impacts, among other things, the tension stored in the outer layers, the ability of the hammer to recoup its original shape and the hysteresis loop, can and will affect hammer string contact time.   Of course, some of those changes may be desirable depending on what we have in front of us and what we're after.  But all of these processes will produce mechanical differences.  Of that there is no question.

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 16:10
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I'm not clear that there is necessarily that much mechanical difference between lacquered and unlacquered hammers when it comes to filing to a point. That is, I think you also lose tension across the top when you file lacquered hammers, and that that has a significant effect on the tone. The actual results will vary depending how much lacquer.

If you use a more minimal amount (say one dose of the recommended 3% solids solution), the effect of such sharpening - removing felt from the upper shoulders, and thereby losing much of the integrity of the upper layers of felt stretched across the crown - will deaden tone somewhat and lose tonal gradient. Of course, you can then add more lacquer and brighten it back up, but you won't get back tonal gradient.

With a more heavily lacquered hammer, the difference will be less noticeable in terms of "deadening," though it will remove some of the really harsh sound on hard blows and give somewhat more clarity and focus, but you are mostly stuck with a small range of tone color, mostly limited to what you do in surface work.

Bottom line is that I am not a fan of sharpening, myself. I know a lot of people say they get good results by creating the Steinway egg shape. That hasn't been my experience, but then I do use pretty minimal lacquer on the Steinway produced hammers I care for, and I treat them much as I would treat other hammers, doing the same sort of opening of shoulders and so forth.

I think there is a pretty broad range of what "lacquered hammer" can mean. A wee spritz (like a drop on each string groove) to give attack a bit of zing it was missing is a long way from hammers that have been repeated saturated with too heavy a solution. And there are a lot of people putting far too much lacquer in hammers, largely due to the bad communication over many years (the widely publicized doctrine of 3:1 solution without the specification of 12% solids being the worst culprit - the Steinway techs were reporting accurately what they did, but they were using lacquer out of the spray booth, already thinned by half for spraying).

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 13:22
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It raises several questions.  

What sound was intended?  
I don't think the current Steinway hammer conforms to the original hammers at all.  The original hammers (up until about 1937) where a different felt, more like the current Weickert felt, a different weight and a different pressing and received a different treatment.  So when we discuss the original design of the instrument and consider that the design was intended to match string scale, soundboard design and hammer design, then we might conclude that one of those components no longer conforms to the original design.  The original hammer pre 1937 tended to much more round btw.  Filing the hammer to a point seems to have come about more recently and seems to coincide with the use of lacquer.  

Should we treat a non-Steinway hammer like a Steinway hammer?
It depends on the hammer.  If you take a Renner Blue and file it to a point you'll get something quite different than Renner intended and it won't sound like a Steinway hammer.  Interestingly, by filing that hammer to a point you will effectively remove tension from the crown of the hammer, deadening it somewhat, and that can be effective (though not recommended) for killing an overly bright hammer.  In the case of Ronsen, a Bacon felt hammer will certainly need lacquer and once lacquered you can treat it just like a Steinway hammer and shape it as you wish.  In this case I'd probably follow the Steinway protocol.  If you order a very large, say 16 lb, hammer from Weickert or Wurzen hammer you will likely have to add some lacquer depending on the set and the piano.  If you order a 14 lb hammer it will depend on the specific set and the dimensions that are achieved.  If you follow the low profile protocol that I employ with them (I have specific felt thickness dimensions which I ask Ray to target--and he does an excellent job there) then I have not found that lacquer is needed (on Wurzen felt, Weickert felt is less predictable for some reason in this respect) and so I maintain the original shape and, in fact, ask Ray to maintain the original shape when the set comes out of the press as much as possible when they do their standard post pressing filing.  I don't like them to be filed very much.  If you are using an Abel hammer you will not want to add lacquer to any of their hammers (that I have experienced) and so you will want to retain the original shape. 

Ultimately how the hammer responds will depend on the belly of the piano.  If you had to boil down what we do as voicers to one simple description it would be we match the impedance characteristics of the belly to the hammer.  That takes into account both the attack sound and the sustain envelope and the partials that remain present after attack.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 08:28
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

David,

Your last paragraph kind of sums up what I was getting at. If you were to take a new Ronsen hammer with Weickert or Wurzen felt and shape it as per Steinway published specs it would be a disaster, unless of course you fill it up with lacquer, and then what would be the point of using those hammers? 

So, If we are going to change our hammer spec then we need to accept the fact that the instrument may no longer sound as it was "intended" to. Maybe it will be "better", but that is fraught with opinion. Personally I very much like Ronsen hammers...

Is there any sense in treating a non-Steinway hammer as if it were a Steinway hammer?  I am curious.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:05
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I think it's important. I have two theories.

First, it's important because of lacquer noise. With wear, as the strike point widens and compresses, lacquer that leaches to the shoulder tends to produce noise. A narrower strike point minimizes that.

Second, since lacquer reduces the coefficient of restitution, how fast the hammer regains its original shape after compression, harder blows will tend to result in longer hammer string contact time and filter high partial development more than hammers with a higher coefficient. A narrower strike point in that case, will help produce more high partial energy on harder blows, which is what you want. 

Better is to have an unadulterated hammer with a high coefficient of restitution and natural spring rate that controls energy transfer effectively at all dynamic levels. It's better if the hammer comes that way out of the press rather than having to try and achieve that with either lots of needling or applications of lacquer since both will compromise the integrity of the hammer's restorative properties.

BTW, filing a non lacquered hammer to a pointed shape when the hammer shape is not naturally pointed means you're filing through the tensioned layers of felt and effectively leaving the crown of the hammer unsupported. It ruins the hammer. The lacquer binds the felt together and allows you to pretty much file it to whatever shape you want with relative impunity. For non lacquered hammers you should always preserve the original shape.


------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-02-2017 16:04
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

 

Mechanically this conversation has led us to the question of gang filing opposed to fiIing hammers one at a time.

I remember the first time I witnessed gang filing of hammers in a local PTG meeting, Cincinnati. I was shocked. I was trained as a teenager to use a sanding paddle and shape hammers one at a time. I have experimented with both since, and had good results either way. However, I think being patient and filing one at a time, if you know what you are doing mechanically, is preferable. 

Should we even consider gang filing angled hammers?

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-05-2017 14:24
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The mechanical differences have to be measured not just in the compression phase but in the decompression phase as well.  How the hammer rebounds off the string is largely influenced by how the hammer decompresses, or the restitution phase.  That affects the time that the hammer dwells on the string (research articles by Daniel A. Russell) which in turn affects not only the impedance characteristics of the hammer (how energy transfers to the string) but the filtering of, especially, high partial energy.  Lacquering the hammer, needling or changing the shape which impacts, among other things, the tension stored in the outer layers, the ability of the hammer to recoup its original shape and the hysteresis loop, can and will affect hammer string contact time.   Of course, some of those changes may be desirable depending on what we have in front of us and what we're after.  But all of these processes will produce mechanical differences.  Of that there is no question.

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 16:10
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I'm not clear that there is necessarily that much mechanical difference between lacquered and unlacquered hammers when it comes to filing to a point. That is, I think you also lose tension across the top when you file lacquered hammers, and that that has a significant effect on the tone. The actual results will vary depending how much lacquer.

If you use a more minimal amount (say one dose of the recommended 3% solids solution), the effect of such sharpening - removing felt from the upper shoulders, and thereby losing much of the integrity of the upper layers of felt stretched across the crown - will deaden tone somewhat and lose tonal gradient. Of course, you can then add more lacquer and brighten it back up, but you won't get back tonal gradient.

With a more heavily lacquered hammer, the difference will be less noticeable in terms of "deadening," though it will remove some of the really harsh sound on hard blows and give somewhat more clarity and focus, but you are mostly stuck with a small range of tone color, mostly limited to what you do in surface work.

Bottom line is that I am not a fan of sharpening, myself. I know a lot of people say they get good results by creating the Steinway egg shape. That hasn't been my experience, but then I do use pretty minimal lacquer on the Steinway produced hammers I care for, and I treat them much as I would treat other hammers, doing the same sort of opening of shoulders and so forth.

I think there is a pretty broad range of what "lacquered hammer" can mean. A wee spritz (like a drop on each string groove) to give attack a bit of zing it was missing is a long way from hammers that have been repeated saturated with too heavy a solution. And there are a lot of people putting far too much lacquer in hammers, largely due to the bad communication over many years (the widely publicized doctrine of 3:1 solution without the specification of 12% solids being the worst culprit - the Steinway techs were reporting accurately what they did, but they were using lacquer out of the spray booth, already thinned by half for spraying).

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 13:22
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It raises several questions.  

What sound was intended?  
I don't think the current Steinway hammer conforms to the original hammers at all.  The original hammers (up until about 1937) where a different felt, more like the current Weickert felt, a different weight and a different pressing and received a different treatment.  So when we discuss the original design of the instrument and consider that the design was intended to match string scale, soundboard design and hammer design, then we might conclude that one of those components no longer conforms to the original design.  The original hammer pre 1937 tended to much more round btw.  Filing the hammer to a point seems to have come about more recently and seems to coincide with the use of lacquer.  

Should we treat a non-Steinway hammer like a Steinway hammer?
It depends on the hammer.  If you take a Renner Blue and file it to a point you'll get something quite different than Renner intended and it won't sound like a Steinway hammer.  Interestingly, by filing that hammer to a point you will effectively remove tension from the crown of the hammer, deadening it somewhat, and that can be effective (though not recommended) for killing an overly bright hammer.  In the case of Ronsen, a Bacon felt hammer will certainly need lacquer and once lacquered you can treat it just like a Steinway hammer and shape it as you wish.  In this case I'd probably follow the Steinway protocol.  If you order a very large, say 16 lb, hammer from Weickert or Wurzen hammer you will likely have to add some lacquer depending on the set and the piano.  If you order a 14 lb hammer it will depend on the specific set and the dimensions that are achieved.  If you follow the low profile protocol that I employ with them (I have specific felt thickness dimensions which I ask Ray to target--and he does an excellent job there) then I have not found that lacquer is needed (on Wurzen felt, Weickert felt is less predictable for some reason in this respect) and so I maintain the original shape and, in fact, ask Ray to maintain the original shape when the set comes out of the press as much as possible when they do their standard post pressing filing.  I don't like them to be filed very much.  If you are using an Abel hammer you will not want to add lacquer to any of their hammers (that I have experienced) and so you will want to retain the original shape. 

Ultimately how the hammer responds will depend on the belly of the piano.  If you had to boil down what we do as voicers to one simple description it would be we match the impedance characteristics of the belly to the hammer.  That takes into account both the attack sound and the sustain envelope and the partials that remain present after attack.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 08:28
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

David,

Your last paragraph kind of sums up what I was getting at. If you were to take a new Ronsen hammer with Weickert or Wurzen felt and shape it as per Steinway published specs it would be a disaster, unless of course you fill it up with lacquer, and then what would be the point of using those hammers? 

So, If we are going to change our hammer spec then we need to accept the fact that the instrument may no longer sound as it was "intended" to. Maybe it will be "better", but that is fraught with opinion. Personally I very much like Ronsen hammers...

Is there any sense in treating a non-Steinway hammer as if it were a Steinway hammer?  I am curious.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:05
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I think it's important. I have two theories.

First, it's important because of lacquer noise. With wear, as the strike point widens and compresses, lacquer that leaches to the shoulder tends to produce noise. A narrower strike point minimizes that.

Second, since lacquer reduces the coefficient of restitution, how fast the hammer regains its original shape after compression, harder blows will tend to result in longer hammer string contact time and filter high partial development more than hammers with a higher coefficient. A narrower strike point in that case, will help produce more high partial energy on harder blows, which is what you want. 

Better is to have an unadulterated hammer with a high coefficient of restitution and natural spring rate that controls energy transfer effectively at all dynamic levels. It's better if the hammer comes that way out of the press rather than having to try and achieve that with either lots of needling or applications of lacquer since both will compromise the integrity of the hammer's restorative properties.

BTW, filing a non lacquered hammer to a pointed shape when the hammer shape is not naturally pointed means you're filing through the tensioned layers of felt and effectively leaving the crown of the hammer unsupported. It ruins the hammer. The lacquer binds the felt together and allows you to pretty much file it to whatever shape you want with relative impunity. For non lacquered hammers you should always preserve the original shape.


------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-02-2017 16:04
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

 

<sup>Ben,

I have tried both ways. My conclusion is that it is better to file individually. I feel I have better control over the final result considering that I can feel it individually whereas with gang filing I cannot. And I have never been able to master the "individual" sheet method.  Inconsistency being the result.</sup> 

That said, if there is substantial meat to remove I may gang file initially, then come back and finish with the paddle. It depends on my mood.

I can honestly say I have never really liked what I got with gang filing. I consider it to be a 'quick and dirty' method, although I will go over just the crowns quickly with fine paper as a final thing. Very little removal.

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-05-2017 15:02
From: Benjamin Sloane
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Mechanically this conversation has led us to the question of gang filing opposed to fiIing hammers one at a time.

I remember the first time I witnessed gang filing of hammers in a local PTG meeting, Cincinnati. I was shocked. I was trained as a teenager to use a sanding paddle and shape hammers one at a time. I have experimented with both since, and had good results either way. However, I think being patient and filing one at a time, if you know what you are doing mechanically, is preferable. 

Should we even consider gang filing angled hammers?

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-05-2017 14:24
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

The mechanical differences have to be measured not just in the compression phase but in the decompression phase as well.  How the hammer rebounds off the string is largely influenced by how the hammer decompresses, or the restitution phase.  That affects the time that the hammer dwells on the string (research articles by Daniel A. Russell) which in turn affects not only the impedance characteristics of the hammer (how energy transfers to the string) but the filtering of, especially, high partial energy.  Lacquering the hammer, needling or changing the shape which impacts, among other things, the tension stored in the outer layers, the ability of the hammer to recoup its original shape and the hysteresis loop, can and will affect hammer string contact time.   Of course, some of those changes may be desirable depending on what we have in front of us and what we're after.  But all of these processes will produce mechanical differences.  Of that there is no question.

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 16:10
From: Fred Sturm
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I'm not clear that there is necessarily that much mechanical difference between lacquered and unlacquered hammers when it comes to filing to a point. That is, I think you also lose tension across the top when you file lacquered hammers, and that that has a significant effect on the tone. The actual results will vary depending how much lacquer.

If you use a more minimal amount (say one dose of the recommended 3% solids solution), the effect of such sharpening - removing felt from the upper shoulders, and thereby losing much of the integrity of the upper layers of felt stretched across the crown - will deaden tone somewhat and lose tonal gradient. Of course, you can then add more lacquer and brighten it back up, but you won't get back tonal gradient.

With a more heavily lacquered hammer, the difference will be less noticeable in terms of "deadening," though it will remove some of the really harsh sound on hard blows and give somewhat more clarity and focus, but you are mostly stuck with a small range of tone color, mostly limited to what you do in surface work.

Bottom line is that I am not a fan of sharpening, myself. I know a lot of people say they get good results by creating the Steinway egg shape. That hasn't been my experience, but then I do use pretty minimal lacquer on the Steinway produced hammers I care for, and I treat them much as I would treat other hammers, doing the same sort of opening of shoulders and so forth.

I think there is a pretty broad range of what "lacquered hammer" can mean. A wee spritz (like a drop on each string groove) to give attack a bit of zing it was missing is a long way from hammers that have been repeated saturated with too heavy a solution. And there are a lot of people putting far too much lacquer in hammers, largely due to the bad communication over many years (the widely publicized doctrine of 3:1 solution without the specification of 12% solids being the worst culprit - the Steinway techs were reporting accurately what they did, but they were using lacquer out of the spray booth, already thinned by half for spraying).

------------------------------
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm@unm.edu
http://fredsturm.net
http://www.artoftuning.com
"We either make ourselves happy or miserable. The amount of work is the same." - Carlos Casteneda
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 13:22
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

It raises several questions.  

What sound was intended?  
I don't think the current Steinway hammer conforms to the original hammers at all.  The original hammers (up until about 1937) where a different felt, more like the current Weickert felt, a different weight and a different pressing and received a different treatment.  So when we discuss the original design of the instrument and consider that the design was intended to match string scale, soundboard design and hammer design, then we might conclude that one of those components no longer conforms to the original design.  The original hammer pre 1937 tended to much more round btw.  Filing the hammer to a point seems to have come about more recently and seems to coincide with the use of lacquer.  

Should we treat a non-Steinway hammer like a Steinway hammer?
It depends on the hammer.  If you take a Renner Blue and file it to a point you'll get something quite different than Renner intended and it won't sound like a Steinway hammer.  Interestingly, by filing that hammer to a point you will effectively remove tension from the crown of the hammer, deadening it somewhat, and that can be effective (though not recommended) for killing an overly bright hammer.  In the case of Ronsen, a Bacon felt hammer will certainly need lacquer and once lacquered you can treat it just like a Steinway hammer and shape it as you wish.  In this case I'd probably follow the Steinway protocol.  If you order a very large, say 16 lb, hammer from Weickert or Wurzen hammer you will likely have to add some lacquer depending on the set and the piano.  If you order a 14 lb hammer it will depend on the specific set and the dimensions that are achieved.  If you follow the low profile protocol that I employ with them (I have specific felt thickness dimensions which I ask Ray to target--and he does an excellent job there) then I have not found that lacquer is needed (on Wurzen felt, Weickert felt is less predictable for some reason in this respect) and so I maintain the original shape and, in fact, ask Ray to maintain the original shape when the set comes out of the press as much as possible when they do their standard post pressing filing.  I don't like them to be filed very much.  If you are using an Abel hammer you will not want to add lacquer to any of their hammers (that I have experienced) and so you will want to retain the original shape. 

Ultimately how the hammer responds will depend on the belly of the piano.  If you had to boil down what we do as voicers to one simple description it would be we match the impedance characteristics of the belly to the hammer.  That takes into account both the attack sound and the sustain envelope and the partials that remain present after attack.  

------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 08:28
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

David,

Your last paragraph kind of sums up what I was getting at. If you were to take a new Ronsen hammer with Weickert or Wurzen felt and shape it as per Steinway published specs it would be a disaster, unless of course you fill it up with lacquer, and then what would be the point of using those hammers? 

So, If we are going to change our hammer spec then we need to accept the fact that the instrument may no longer sound as it was "intended" to. Maybe it will be "better", but that is fraught with opinion. Personally I very much like Ronsen hammers...

Is there any sense in treating a non-Steinway hammer as if it were a Steinway hammer?  I am curious.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:05
From: David Love
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I think it's important. I have two theories.

First, it's important because of lacquer noise. With wear, as the strike point widens and compresses, lacquer that leaches to the shoulder tends to produce noise. A narrower strike point minimizes that.

Second, since lacquer reduces the coefficient of restitution, how fast the hammer regains its original shape after compression, harder blows will tend to result in longer hammer string contact time and filter high partial development more than hammers with a higher coefficient. A narrower strike point in that case, will help produce more high partial energy on harder blows, which is what you want. 

Better is to have an unadulterated hammer with a high coefficient of restitution and natural spring rate that controls energy transfer effectively at all dynamic levels. It's better if the hammer comes that way out of the press rather than having to try and achieve that with either lots of needling or applications of lacquer since both will compromise the integrity of the hammer's restorative properties.

BTW, filing a non lacquered hammer to a pointed shape when the hammer shape is not naturally pointed means you're filing through the tensioned layers of felt and effectively leaving the crown of the hammer unsupported. It ruins the hammer. The lacquer binds the felt together and allows you to pretty much file it to whatever shape you want with relative impunity. For non lacquered hammers you should always preserve the original shape.


------------------------------
David Love RPT
www.davidlovepianos.com
davidlovepianos@comcast.net
415 407 8320
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-02-2017 16:04
From: Peter Grey
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

I am coming into this discussion quite late but have read through all comments. What I have found missing is any emphasis on hammer shape. So my question to you all is:

How much stock do you put in Steinway's official published information on hammer shape? You know that pointy look that does not exist on any hammer coming out of the press (but must be filed into it) vs. following the existing shape of whatever the hammer actually is. Does anyone create that point? (Ever seen a Steingraeber hammer?)

If so, how important is this to you in creating the Steinway sound?

Interested in any and all comments.

Pwg

------------------------------
Peter Grey
Stratham NH
603-686-2395
pianodoctor57@gmail.com
------------------------------

 

Original Message------

Horace,

In the "Hamburg Steinway grands" thread you stated "While the newer NY hammers are somewhat smaller, denser, and lighter, they still require a good deal of attention before being ready for prime time." I would greatly appreciate it if you (or anyone else on this list) could take the time to detail your experiences with the newer Steinway hammer.

I have yet to run into these hammers but a client of mine may have the hammers replaced on his L when he has the money. He specifically asked for the NY hammers. It would be nice to have some information on how to approach the voicing before I do the job.

Thanks!

------------------------------
[Don] [McKechnie,] [RPT]
[Piano Technician]
[dmckech@ithaca.edu]
[Home 607.277.7112]
------------------------------

August Co-practicioners,

I think 4:1 from a 12% solution would be 2.4% solids. It bears mentioning in this discussion that The NY hammers for models B & D are almost an entirely different species from those for model SMLO. I haven't looked closely at many new A's and so won't comment on which camp they belong in. While the SMLO hammers are very much consistent with hammers from the recent decades and are substantially pre lacquered  The B & D hammers are a fairly radical departure from the recent or distant past. I've been told that they are un or minimally lacquered in production.  They also have compression ligatures all the way to # 88 reflecting the higher tension used in pressing.  They are not really at all similar to Hamburg hammers despite what you may read elsewhere.  My experience is that they will respond to very minimal shoulder needling and can be over needled very, very easily.  Lacquering is likewise very different from years past.  The C&A department is using one or two drops of 4:1 right on the string marks and employs very little shaping.  I have had good results with similar technique.  My recommendation would be to cut that mixture to about 6:1 as a starting place.

------------------------------
Karl Roeder
Pompano Beach FL
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:19
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Chris,
Isn't that a 4:1 from a 12% solution? So the 4:1 is now 3% solids?

Earth to PTG,
Last time I checked the L was discontinued. Reintroduced A had old style hammers at first. B is still a B, D is still a D, with a new hammer. Kawai grand is back with the relatively new GL series. Product of the year p 37. Acoustic piano of the year Pearl River p. 99. Don't know what to make of it...

Musical Merchandise Review January 2017

Digitaleditiononline		remove preview
Musical Merchandise Review January 2017 Schimmel & Pearl River : A Partnership for 2017 and Beyond 96 mmrmagazine.com JANUARY 2017 Upfront Q&A: KMCís Mark 54 Terry 70 Buyerís Guide Music Industry Service Award DON JOHNSON Evolving the Future of Guitar Design Chapman Guitars: 102 56 Susan and Jonathan Lipp View this on Digitaleditiononline >

------------------------------
Benjamin Sloane
Cincinnati OH
513-257-8480
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 17:34
From: Karl Roeder
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

August Co-practicioners,

I think 4:1 from a 12% solution would be 2.4% solids. It bears mentioning in this discussion that The NY hammers for models B & D are almost an entirely different species from those for model SMLO. I haven't looked closely at many new A's and so won't comment on which camp they belong in. While the SMLO hammers are very much consistent with hammers from the recent decades and are substantially pre lacquered  The B & D hammers are a fairly radical departure from the recent or distant past. I've been told that they are un or minimally lacquered in production.  They also have compression ligatures all the way to # 88 reflecting the higher tension used in pressing.  They are not really at all similar to Hamburg hammers despite what you may read elsewhere.  My experience is that they will respond to very minimal shoulder needling and can be over needled very, very easily.  Lacquering is likewise very different from years past.  The C&A department is using one or two drops of 4:1 right on the string marks and employs very little shaping.  I have had good results with similar technique.  My recommendation would be to cut that mixture to about 6:1 as a starting place.

------------------------------
Karl Roeder
Pompano Beach FL
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:19
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Chris,
Isn't that a 4:1 from a 12% solution? So the 4:1 is now 3% solids?

Hi everyone. 

I need to echo Karl's recommendation for treatment of the new D hammers. He has done some work on the pianos I care for, and he has been gracious with answers to my questions specific to getting this newD to open up and respond. I my case playing time of the piano was needed and also a need for constant attention to its tone. It is finally producing and delivering. As it gets more playing time the constant attention, I anticipate, will become less. 
Thank you Karl. 

------------------------------
-Phil Bondi
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-04-2017 17:34
From: Karl Roeder
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

August Co-practicioners,

I think 4:1 from a 12% solution would be 2.4% solids. It bears mentioning in this discussion that The NY hammers for models B & D are almost an entirely different species from those for model SMLO. I haven't looked closely at many new A's and so won't comment on which camp they belong in. While the SMLO hammers are very much consistent with hammers from the recent decades and are substantially pre lacquered  The B & D hammers are a fairly radical departure from the recent or distant past. I've been told that they are un or minimally lacquered in production.  They also have compression ligatures all the way to # 88 reflecting the higher tension used in pressing.  They are not really at all similar to Hamburg hammers despite what you may read elsewhere.  My experience is that they will respond to very minimal shoulder needling and can be over needled very, very easily.  Lacquering is likewise very different from years past.  The C&A department is using one or two drops of 4:1 right on the string marks and employs very little shaping.  I have had good results with similar technique.  My recommendation would be to cut that mixture to about 6:1 as a starting place.

------------------------------
Karl Roeder
Pompano Beach FL
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 02-03-2017 01:19
From: Chris Chernobieff
Subject: NY Steinway Hammers

Chris,
Isn't that a 4:1 from a 12% solution? So the 4:1 is now 3% solids?